Skip to content or view screen version

Sheffield Anti bush demo & analysis

Bored Marcher | 16.11.2003 21:17 | Bush 2003 | Analysis | Anti-militarism | Culture | Sheffield

An analysis of yesterday's Sheffield demonstration against George Bush.

Demo apathy - what is it, what causes it.

Why we keep on repeating the same tactics that never achieve the results we want?

The unity of Police and protesters symbolises a secret set of shared goals.
The unity of Police and protesters symbolises a secret set of shared goals.

Anti-bush sentiment from the Samba Band yesterday who drew a large crowd on Farg
Anti-bush sentiment from the Samba Band yesterday who drew a large crowd on Farg


Sheffield's anti-Bush demo took place yesterday, Saturday 15th November. This demo was smaller than previous demos with probably less than a thousand people. Previous anti-war demos in Sheffield have attracted up to 2,500. There are several explanations for the drop in numbers.

Firstly the publicity, to me at least, seemed less prominent. This probably has something to with the fact that the core of the local Stop the War Coalition has less people now and so inevitably less people to do the hard work of publicity. It's credit to those who put the work in to make this happen at all. And the local coalition are also organising coaches to take people to London on Thursday, another unenviable job that takes a lot of hard work and energy.

Secondly there is not the urgency or the immediacy there was in the build up to war. We're not about save thousands of lives, and we're not going to stop George Bush coming to Britain. One person from the STWC was collecting signatures to petition Blair to revoke the invitation. I signed it knowing full well I was only doing so to make the person collecting signatures feel better rather than have any impact on Bush's visit next week.

Thirdly there were some Sheffield folk who are still not back from the European Social Forum in Paris. Although the number there was probably no more than around 30 (if that) perhaps some of these would have helped with building this event.

Finally there is something which could be described as demo apathy. I know some people, very political and 100% anti-Bush who knew about the demo yet didn't even bother to go. One person stayed in bed. Another friend decided that cleaning up the house was a more important priority and saw yesterday's demonstration as pointless.

Demo apathy is similar to voter apathy. Essentially we've all be through the routine several times before and we're starting to realise that these public spectacles aren't going to make any difference at all. Ken Livingstone once said, "If voting changed anything they'd abolish it". Well the same could be said about demonstrations too.

In fact these state sanctioned spectacles are not only no problem for those in power, those in power use them as propaganda to justify their position. Earlier in the week close Bush official, Condoleeza Rice, was asked about the anticipated anti-Bush protests. Her reply: "...the President, as he said in Australia, he understands free speech, welcomes free speech. People can protest and say what they want. It's a good thing to remember that the kinds of things that we're fighting for worldwide are so that people can have free speech and protest." [1]

So it's no surprise that the Police, who are part of the state that we're supposed to be against, are happy to work alongside the Stop the War Coalition.

Demonstrations serve several purposes for those on both sides. They allow people to express their anger at the government and the system in a way that is totally acceptable to those in power. Anger and frustration have to be vented and expressed somewhere so what better way than through a nice orderly walk around the town, perhaps with some chanting and offensive banners thrown in if you're really angry.

Secondly they allow those who take part to feel better about themselves. They vehemently oppose what is going on and now they've done something about it. One can go home and feel that, "Well, at least I tried".

Thirdly demonstrations take relatively little effort and zero risk. This is true for both demonstrators and the Police. If you go to London the coaches are all laid on and all one has to do is turn up. It's a fast food form of struggle that can be carried out with the minimum of effort and commitment. The event is consumed and the participant can quickly return to normal life the next day. This again serves the interests of both sides.

Finally demonstrations are useful to those in power to prove what a nice rosy democracy we all live in. The fact that those demonstrating are always completely ignored is conveniently forgotten by both sides.

The most significant victory against those in power in recent history has to be the defeat of the Poll Tax which brought down the Iron Lady, Maggie Thatcher, too. Although the large demos played a part in this what won the campaign was direct action on a massive scale. A significant part of the population were prepared to break the law and refused to pay the tax.

However over past decade there have been important changes in the UK and global political scene that the Stop the War coalition do not seem to be taking account of. Politics in this country has become increasingly polarised. Those in power have become more right wing and a wide spectrum of repressive laws have been brought in. These include things like the CJA, RIP, the so called anti-terrorism laws (that despite the name have mostly be used against ordinary people).

On the other side activism has become increasingly radical. More and more people have been prepared to take direct action, not just in this country but across the globe. Mass events like the Global Street Party Against the G8 in 1998 are augmented by thousands of smaller actions like the continuous trashings of GM crops.

So why doesn't the Stop the War Coalition take this growing radicalism and use it against the crimes committed by our government? It's because the STWC is mostly made up of liberals even though many describe themselves as socialist or revolutionary. Whilst many socialists sincerely embrace the ideas of revolutionary politics when it comes to action most of what they do invariably fits in with a liberal political agenda: demonstrations, petitions, leaflets, vigils and public meetings.

So why do we continue with a range of actions that even George Bush can support? Well a typical answer from those in the STWC will usually explain their tactics in terms of numbers. They want to get as many people to an event as possible regardless of its efficacy. And so working on the premise that most people are liberal it follows that you have to put on a liberal style event, regardless of you're own political beliefs. They won't phrase it like that but that is pretty much what it comes down to.

So one might ask why do they never learn? The historic demo on February 15th was an amazing thing to be a part of but it was also the ultimate proof that demonstrations alone are not going to change government policies. The Bolivian Government fell a few weeks ago not because of demonstrations but because of mass civil unrest. Surely its not that hard to work out?

Recently a friend gave a good explanation. He said people are afraid of confrontation. In fact most will avoid it at all costs. So whilst many people's beliefs and political theory may be genuinely radical its those subconscious fears of confrontation that are often the guiding force of their actions. And until that is recognised it means they will carry on, always able to find arguments that support and lead to a liberal way of doing things.



[1]  http://www.usembassy.org.uk/potusnov03/3potusnov03.html

Bored Marcher

Comments

Hide the following 10 comments

strength is in diversity

16.11.2003 22:30

It was alsmost accidental that the samba band didn't actually process with the walking demo on saturday - before people started off from Barkers Pool we thought we could spread the word a bit by playing down in Fargate. Some of our people were quite disturbed by not walking round with the demo but in the eventuality we didn't get it together to join in on time - typical samba dynamics. We wanted to support the demo but thought the best way was to spread it about a bit instead of making a dense clump.

And in doing this we feel a response to the above is that people have to get their own act together - not await on some centralist call to action but to work with other things that are going on to be most effective. Find a few friends and plan your own contribution - leaflets, street theatre, music and together we will make a powerful force.

sheffield sambista


Nature of the StWC

16.11.2003 23:32

Agreed that the format of marches is limited. Thought what the Samba band did was great for spreading the message, and also people breaking off from the march to leaflet. The thing that makes me sad is that many people do not see the STWC as a space in which they can operate, but given what has happened in the past that is no surprise. Essentially I think a choice needs to be made over whether the StWC is a genuine umbrella group, offering a means of communication, meeting spaces, publicity, advice, and generally being an organisation which enables people to get together and organise protest of whatever nature. Or is it to be a political party, with a set of unified views and a common front, fitting into the media/political machine.

Personally I would always be open to suggestions from anyone who came along and had an alternative idea for protest, but agreed in it's present centralised form that may be difficult. Then again various local stw groups have organised stuff and there is no reason a group of people could not get together as e.g. Mushroom St STW or whatever, and organise around a particular kind of action.

There is an open meeting to discuss all this, where the Sheffield STW coalition goes next, how is it to be organised, who wants to be a part of it, what sort of principles/issues need to be addressed (i.e. should it take on wider issues) at Quaker Meeting House on 3rd December, 7:30pm. Also any ideas on meeting format welcome as with a lot of people it is inevitable there will be problems in having genuine discussion so may be small groups or summat. Anyways we shall see, all welcome. Tata,

Jase

Jase
mail e-mail: spodulike@freeuk.com


The reason for marches

17.11.2003 02:15

Check out this article, completely against the spirit of this one:
 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2003/11/280599.html

I go on plenty of demo's, do plenty of petitions in the street and attend lots of meetings. I'd go full time, but can't afford it. What I find is that most of the time its a case of trying to balance doing things in a way which people find accessible and doing token gestures on behalf of others. And in case you are wondering, I was in Sheffield, I payed over £9, travelled over 50 miles, and did actually enjoy the day.

I don't chant just cause I get angry, I have my own megaphone and make good use of it (mines the darker blue one) and yes, I'll make demonstrations sound angry even if they aren't. I look forwards to London on Thursday, but violence is the one thing which clouds my hopes for the day. I don't want to be responsible for protecting half my coach from Police retaliation, because a load of anarchists have attacked and fled, and we're the ones in sight for the police to target. Just don't do it, OK.

Subvertising, sure. Flypostering, definately. Road blocks, great. Drama, music, singing, chanting, the more the better. I do believe the anti war movement has become too London-demo orientated, but I know that there are great arguments for this. I think more NVDA is needed, not violence. I shall be more than obliged to take part in a sit down during the Thursday Demo, but if its violence you want I have my coach to protect. Unlike some of you guys, I believe in looking after demonstrators. I know most of you would look after your own groups, but sometimes I wonder.

Rebel W

Rebel W


Vague smears and innuendo from Rebel...

17.11.2003 11:48

These are strange, vague accusations that you make, Rebel W. Who are these people who advicate violence? Who are the ones that aren't interested in protecting the demo? I know you of old as a loyal SWP member, so I have to assume that you're trying to have a go at the anarchists. Are you speaking from experience about the problems with 'violent demonstrators'? You do sound rather like the police... Maybe you are speaking out of experience? Please name a demo that anarchists have caused these problems on.

Or maybe you're just using this innuendo to conceal your own fear of real confrontation? personally I think that there will be thousands up for it on the 20th; we won't need you to lead or protect us, thank you ;-)

anarchist


Rebel W try re-reading it

17.11.2003 12:36

Rebel W says: "I don't want to be responsible for protecting half my coach from Police retaliation, because a load of anarchists have attacked and fled, and we're the ones in sight for the police to target. Just don't do it, OK."


Rebel W, this comment sounds like something straight out of the Daily Mail and somewhat naive too. In the first place the above article does not mention violence or anarchists. That is your interpretation and its interesting because it reflects a prejudice that you and probably many others hold - something you might like to think about. You appear to be seeing the world through the lens of media created stereotypes. It's not that surprising though - the power of the mass media to shape peoples's minds is very strong.

In fact the example used of direct action in the above is non-payment of the Poll Tax. Confrontational yes, but what could be more non-violent than that? And it wasn't just 'a load of anarchists' either.

Secondly I would love to know how you alone intend to protect half a coach load of people from a Police attack. Are you some kind of super Ninja or what?

You seem to be under another media illusion that the police only attack when attacked. I saw the Sheffield Samba Band attacked at the DSEi protests in London. They were playing happily in the road outside a hotel of arms dealers when the Police charged them, sending them flying, slamming them against railings. This was done without any provocation from the Samba band and without any warning from the police.

On the same evening another person sustained severe nerve damage and had to be operated on when a policeman just struck him on the arm with a batton for no apparent reason. I was attacked by another policeman there for attempting to talk to a police photographer.

Our history is littered with examples but they don't get reported on the 6.00 o'clock news. Have you never heard of the Battle of the Beanfield, the Genoa Social Forum, or Simon Chapman? If not I suggest trying Google to find out.

Bored Marcher


new tactics needed

17.11.2003 17:37

(i am the writer of the why we march article  http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/sheffield/2003/11/280599.html) and i agree with steve that we need a new emphasis on the purpose of marching and could we gain the same results through other methods?

Also the biggest issues in sheffield directly affecting residents is not bush landing and i would like to see the same efforts into fighting for the basic improvements in the enviroment (be it social, economic etc...) as there is into stopping bush and stopping war. Why? because if we fight for these basic rights then we can link in with these fights and alot more people will see it of huge importantance to oppose war and oppose bush. There does seem to be a growing agreement on getting more basic rights and levels of desency to *everyone* be they from yorkshire/lincoln shire/iraq/latin america.

cuthbert


a couple of good reasons for marching

17.11.2003 17:58

1. Still a lot of folk out there ready to march but not to take direct action.

2. Marches are big, high profile, reported across the world (which inspires others).


But anyway, why counterpose marches to other actions? Can't we do both?

kurious


Kuriosity points

17.11.2003 20:03

Kurious says:
1. Still a lot of folk out there ready to march but not to take direct action.

There are more creative ways of doing this - and we don't have always ask the state for permission for what should be our democratic right.



2 Marches are big, high profile, reported across the world (which inspires others).

Not true.

Actually in terms of mass actions marches are one of the easiest things for the press to ignore. The media thrive on unusal stories to sell their papers, news etc. Anything that departs from the norm is likely to get more publicity than a march. There's really not that much to say about them about from how many people turned out.

A lot of demos in London are frequently completely ignored by the mainstream press. It's only the really big ones that get reported. How much coverage did this one get? Very little I'd imagine. One line on an inside story of the Sunday Times is all I've seen so far.

Bored Marcher


don't forget the rest of the world!

18.11.2003 16:24

The mass marches HAVE had extensive coverage across the world, especially in Arab media where they have considerable impact. Also in the US; see comments on Stop Bush protests.

And even here, they may not get reported wall-to-wall, but they do get reported, and people are aware of them.

kurious


hugging trees instead

19.11.2003 12:12

emf (eat more fruit) was at 5pm friday night going to make an apperance.. however meeting up saturday morning the weather being just nice and other factours at 11am we decided no.. there are lots of resons for this.. the continued scape-goating of myself from some memebers of sheffield samba and others i persanally did feel inclined to attend and place myself in the fireing line againe.. knowing the route we did not see the point in such a shourt demo where the masses would not see us.. i remmber the days marching from spitall hill pass the markets into town around town and back to the city hall.. dureing the protest over rate capeing i remmeber an hour on people was still flooding into the city hall wich had been booked for the post march being preached at.. there was standing room only outside.. likewise dureing the protest over the poll tax.. my feelings are we have become more selfish ie thatcher and the era of the self.. the increase in drugs ie skunk that leads to paranoia.. plus a host of other sociall and politcal facters.. people do give a shit.. just look at the rise of the bnp.. we need to return back to our communtys interact with them - re-educate etc.. it is less to do with apathy but more to with sectarianism and the continued inabilty of the movemant to communcate with the working class.. this is why i feel there was little intrest in the demo.. of course there are other factours.. but we need to look inwords to solve this and not keep scapegaoting people like myself the swp for our in ablity to apeal to the working class..

mozaz

mozaz
mail e-mail: markmozazwallis@yahoo.com
- Homepage: http://19896.lowtech.org